so they knew people were throwing them at people

they're still endorsing throwing them at people

The best way to read it is the social media person did that without consulting someone higher up and then they got told to make the second tweet

No, the person running the twitter could just be happy to get people to buy their crappy shakes, not caring about what people will do with them (not that throwing shakes at people is the worst).

I'm just saying, we don't know their intent, so i am not trying to read to much into it till we know more (if anyone cares).

that be like rental enterprise being told to hold off on renting more cars because people were running people over with the rental and hertz goes hey we're still renting our cars out. but hey that guy just wanted to rent out more cars

thats still shit thing to do

And humans do stupid things like that all the time, without realizing the bad intent of said actions.

The action was still bad. And in this specific case this person still put selling milkshakes above not endorsing violence

no matter what they knew people were throwing them at people

so your still excusing someon endorsing violence

You can not know if its an endorsement of violence or not... We only know they are trying to sell shakes.

No this person had to know the context to formulate the tweet that way. other wise it would be more generic like a general tweet about selling milkshakes

They knew specifically about the issue in scotland

If they generically said something like milkshakes on sale this weekend. then they might not have known

Its actually more specific than even my car analogy above because it gives a time frame and location.

Also a quick scan of their twitter shows they don't formulate promotion tweets like that. furthering they were refercing that specific event

Like I said the good faith interpretation is that a person who does endorse made that tweet, but that isn't the stance of the company.

See post about other company being asked not to sell milkshakes in area.
Offers people who would like them to go to their store instead.

Where in that sequence of actions did an endorsement happen?
I'm only saying, since i'm not a mind reader. Without understanding the person who put the posts ups intent, i can't say Why they did it or not.

The #justsaying confirms they knew to me

I could totally see some stupid person who runs the twitter saying to themselves "hehehe own the stupid racist sexist brexiters", and later someone higher up saying hey what the hell, send out a tweet saying we don't endorse violence.

1. Social media manager 2. for Burger King

I'd put the chance that they're a leftist at 99%

@grant Yes, you can see that. But is it what we know? I'm more then happy with your last point of its just the persons dumb tweet, but since i don't know what that person thinks, i don't like reading ill intend into foolish actions (unless its clearly understood).

Why mention scotland

why mention mention that specific weekend

........

why #justdsaying?

^that's the other thing the timing is when Tommy will be there

why specifically milkshakes

there no special deal on milkshakes they could have said burgers

after all they are **burger** king

There is no way to reconcile mentioning those specific things unless they know about the ban.

You got all the clues, they hate all the people who were getting milkshakes being thrown at, so in order to let this keep happening they offer people use theirs instead. Clearly this could be the only possibility.
(This could all be 100% true, but do we Know it, is my point)

What other reason to mention those specific things? there is no other reason

lol

Did they think milkshakes were going to turn into monsters in scotland on that specific weekend

You don't think human stupidity couldn't be the reason?

I linked a vid for you, grant

it is human stupidty. that why they encouraged violence

There are other reasons to do things that don't have to do with encouraging violence. But i guess that's the only one that works......